Searching for salary-cap space to extend their two best players, the Green Bay Packers haven't approached the agent for linebacker A.J. Hawk about a pay cut but probably will do so before long.

Mike McCartney, the longtime agent for Hawk, said he planned to discuss that looming possibility in a face-to-face meeting with his client this week.

"A.J. and I haven't broached that subject yet," McCartney said at the National Football League scouting combine. "We really haven't. But we will."

Although McCartney did talk with Packers vice president Russ Ball Friday in Indianapolis, the agent said he wasn't informed how the club views Hawk's cap salary of $7.05 million for 2013.

"I know Green Bay values A.J.," said McCartney. "I know they like A.J. a lot . . . and I know they have some issues. So we'll see."

Hawk, a two-down strong inside linebacker in a 3-4 defense, ranks fourth on the team in cap salary for the coming season behind quarterback Aaron Rodgers ($9.75M), tight end Jermichael Finley ($8.75M) and cornerback Tramon Williams ($8.5M).

If the Packers released Hawk, they would gain $5.45M against the '13 cap by eliminating his $4.9M base salary, $300,000 per-game roster bonus and $250,000 workout bonus.

Regardless of what happens, the Packers must count $1.6M against their '13 cap and another $3.2M in the future as the remaining prorated portions of the $8M signing bonus that was part of Hawk's five-year, $33.75M contract signed on the eve of the lockout in March 2011.

Hawk, 29, played 5 to 7 pounds lighter last season, improving his range and coverage. He led the inside linebackers in tackles per snap (one every 5.3), allowed the fewest plays of 20 yards or more (2½) of any linebacker and led the team in tackles (157) and tackles for loss with a career-high 5½.

He also missed nine tackles in 833 snaps after having missed 15 in 910 snaps in 2011.

At the same time, Hawk failed to generate a takeaway for the second straight season and didn't break up a single pass.

"I think that (a pay cut for Hawk) is a possibility because of the money they're paying against the production," an executive in personnel for an AFC team said last week. "Seven million is a big number for a guy that's a two-down player. If I was the Packers, I'd be thinking about renegotiation.

"They're also dealing from a position of strength. They've got guys. Would you rather allocate those dollars to a younger player like Brad Jones? They've got D.J. Smith. It's not a position of need."

If the Packers released Hawk, let Jones walk in unrestricted free agency and continued to have reservations about Desmond Bishop's post-surgical quadriceps tear, they could look for cheaper veteran insurance in someone like Nick Barnett, who was cut by Buffalo Feb. 11.

Barnett, regarded by many scouts as a better player than Hawk during their five seasons playing together in Green Bay, is 31. His minimum salary for 2013 would be $940,000.

"The good news for A.J. Hawk is he'd have a marketplace if he was cut," the scout said. "It's a thin market at linebacker in free agency and it's another thin year in the draft in terms of depth at inside linebacker."

Bishop, 28, went down in the first exhibition game and has been in rehabilitation mode for months. It's a brutal injury, one that can leave players susceptible to a reduced level of performance and the chance of additional tears.

"They haven't given me a reason to worry a lot," coach Mike McCarthy said Saturday, referring to the team's medical staff. "But it was a different injury."

Smith, who first replaced Bishop on the weak inside, blew out his knee in the sixth game.

After Bishop and Smith came Jones, who played 794 of a possible 801 snaps in the final 12 games and did a respectable job.

"In free agency, you try to find guys who are up-and-comers," one NFL executive said. "This year, (Jones) could be one of those guys.

"Maybe on some NFL teams he would be their third-best guy in a 4-3, but maybe for the balance of teams he's that fourth-best guy. Needless to say, there's a marketplace for him. The market will tell him if he's a starter."

Rob Francois, who backed up Hawk but hasn't played from scrimmage since 2011, will be a restricted free agent. The Packers can protect their rights to Francois and all but eliminate any chance he'd receive an offer sheet by tendering him early next month at $1.323M for 2013.

Francois might not receive a tender, thereby becoming a street free agent, because the restricted tenders have skyrocketed under the most recent collective bargaining agreement.

"It's one of the worst things that happened with the new CBA," said Noel LaMontagne, the agent for Francois. "The tenders are so high now."

A likely scenario would be for the Packers to cast Francois adrift without a tender and then attempt to resign him for the third-year veteran minimum salary of $660,000.

"They love him, but they might have to look at another way of keeping him," LaMontagne said. "He's in the mix, but we'll see."

The Packers' extreme depth at inside linebacker also includes Terrell Manning and Jamari Lattimore.

As the Packers ponder cap moves to extend the contracts of Clay Matthews and Rodgers, they will consider the reliability and durability of Hawk, who has started all but two games in his seven-year career.

"The hardest players in the business to value are the guys who do dirty work," said McCartney, a former pro scout for the Chicago Bears and Philadelphia Eagles. "There is a lot of inherent dirty work that A.J. does.

"You can't measure how he directs everybody. He sends people to the right spots. So I think there's a lot of intangibles there."

A.J. Hawk's cap salary of $7.05 million for 2013 is mind boggling! I am not a Hawk hater, but I think that's probably $3 million more than he should be getting. I sure wish these contracts were written so they wouldn't have to be restructured years later.

Somewhere it was posted The Packers had to take a 4.5 mil cap hit if Hawk was released.

This article states a much lower number.

Time to make a lot of people happy and cut ties with Hawk.

The one thing The Packers have is an abundancy of ilb's.

Time to get younger.

My only worry is that Teams in the NFL usually don't succeed when all their money is put into 3 or 4 guys.

Here is what Hawk has left on is contract:

Each of the 1.6m (4.8M) part of his carried signing bonus will have to be accounted for against the cap, I am assuming the article is assuming that they will push that hit out until next season. The roster bonuses that have not paid out will not have to be absorbed.

Packers track record is not to push issues into the future.. so I don't see them, if they cut ties with Hawk to do so and have impact on future years cap number. Especially where they will have larger cap numbers for Rodgers & Matthews and will still be looking to field a competitive team.

I'd rather pay Brad Jones half of AJ's inflated contract and let Hawk go find his true value elsewhere. Hawk was rewarded for a very good 2010 season. Ted sure likes to pay linebackers, probably because he was one. I think the Packers know what they have in Manning, I'm just hoping they are right. As for Bishop and Smith, none of us will know until training camp.

Hawk is probably in a pretty good negotiating position for this year anyway. Hope he volunteers the restructuring instead of forcing the Packers hand.

I'd rather pay Brad Jones half of AJ's inflated contract and let Hawk go find his true value elsewhere. Hawk was rewarded for a very good 2010 season. Ted sure likes to pay linebackers, probably because he was one. I think the Packers know what they have in Manning, I'm just hoping they are right. As for Bishop and Smith, none of us will know until training camp.

Hawk is probably in a pretty good negotiating position for this year anyway. Hope he volunteers the restructuring instead of forcing the Packers hand.

Trade him, don't just release him outright.

That way we get something for him, even if it's a late round pick. PLUS, the good part is, the other team will be responsible for his future cap hits if THEY want to cut him. They can always renegotiate with him if they want.

That way we get something for him, even if it's a late round pick. PLUS, the good part is, the other team will be responsible for his future cap hits if THEY want to cut him. They can always renegotiate with him if they want.

Who will trade for him with that contract? They would likely have to have a deal in place to restructure with the new team for any trade to happen, and if that's the case, why wouldn't he simply restructure with GB?

That way we get something for him, even if it's a late round pick. PLUS, the good part is, the other team will be responsible for his future cap hits if THEY want to cut him. They can always renegotiate with him if they want.

Yeah, there'd be about as big a market for Hawk's contract as there is for a DakotaT spermbank!!! \:d/

Who will trade for him with that contract? They would likely have to have a deal in place to restructure with the new team for any trade to happen, and if that's the case, why wouldn't he simply restructure with GB?

If he's gonna restructure anyway, why wouldn't he do so with a team that doesn't have 6 other guys who can play at his position?

It may be going against trend, but I liked AJ's performance this year. He's a bit lumbering/a bit of a liability in pass coverage and had no turnovers, but was quicker this year and was more of a force behind the line of scrimmage.

That said, I don't think he's worth anywhere near that kind of money and hope he'd be receptive to renegotiating his contract. If he's not willing to take enough of a reduction, then time for a change.

AJ Hawk was solid and steady for GB this last season. As a matter of fact, he was a bit quicker. We could see that. He did a decent job of setting the D. I think his shortcomings are in coverage, blitzing the QB, and in getting tackles at the line of scrimmage or behind it. He improved in that last category last year, but I do think his salary requires better production. Many of his tackles were in persuit, after yardage was gained.

More importantly, I don't think he is the type of player opponents have to specifically game plan for. That's not good. Granted, not every player can be that good on your defense. But, at that salary, he should be one of the best players at his position in the NFL. I don't think he ranks I the top 50 LBs. That being the case, it should be addressed. Restructure or release. Keeping him at current salary is severely overpaying.

Bishop may require a restructured deal too. Jones doesn't really appear to be a real answer at ILB, but he showed better than I expected. Smith shouldn't be counted on. I like Moses and Manning seems to have some promise. It will be interesting to see how we improve this group.

Each of the 1.6m (4.8M) part of his carried signing bonus will have to be accounted for against the cap, I am assuming the article is assuming that they will push that hit out until next season. The roster bonuses that have not paid out will not have to be absorbed.

Packers track record is not to push issues into the future.. so I don't see them, if they cut ties with Hawk to do so and have impact on future years cap number. Especially where they will have larger cap numbers for Rodgers & Matthews and will still be looking to field a competitive team.

Thanks Pack93z, thought that 4.8 mil # sounded right.

The Packers would be foolish to release A.J. Hawk.

Sorry to all you who think Hawk is overpaid, looks like he will be around at least 1 more year.

Haven't heard anything about The Packers actually approaching him and his agent about restructuring, when and if that time comes is the time to judge A.J Hawk.

He has always done anything The Packers have asked, so let's just wait and see what his reaction will be instead of speculating.

I'm all for keeping Hawk on this team. But I would love for someone new to come in along with Jones/Smith/Manning backing up Hawk and Bishop. Right now Jones and Bishop are probably the most gifted athletes along the MLB's. We definitely need speed along those LB's as well. Hawk is probably seeing the way of Donald Driver. No not retiring.. But maybe being demoted and off the team in a years time. Never know though, maybe they're fine with the ILB's they have now.

Do you understand the concept of fans being disappointed in a player versus fans hating a player?

The Packer's defensive coaches keep asking him to cover TE's down the seams of the field, but he can't get that right, now can he Buckeye?

AJ has leverage this season, but he would be wise to restructure to ensure he stays a Packer for longer than this season.

Where has it been written the coaches keep asking him to cover TE's down the seam? Are you now in the player/coaches meetings?

Hell take a look back at last year, Hawk wasn't on the field that much on passing downs.

There was a whole article written how The coaching staff did not want to burn out players, hoping to give EVERY player a break, the problem that has occured the last 3 years at the LB position is that A.J Hawk seems to be the only one who can stay healthy.

A.J Hawk could have been rated the best lb in the NFL over his career and you would find something to "BE DISSAPOINTED" about.

Just because he was a 1st rnd pick.

Stop with your bullshit "spins" and just admit no matter how he plays, he will never live up to your "expectations".

I say it every year, I hope one of these young guys "full of potential" will unseat A.J. Hawk, then he can leave Green Bay and go play elsewhere.

Bottom line, the article posted in this thread is just all "skeptisism", until Ted actually meets with Hawk and his agent, nobody knows what they will decide.

Stop with your bullshit "spins" and just admit no matter how he plays, he will never live up to your "expectations".

Yet you're positive you know what everybody thinks with regards to Hawk. Take off your The Ohio State goggles off and get reasonable. I root for Hawk, hell I have a Hawk jersey - but when he's getting torched in coverage I get a little upset because I know what he's getting paid.

If you can't follow rationale, then I guess we don't have anything else to talk about concerning AJ. Just don't insult other Packer fans on the issue because your little feelings get hurt when he's criticized.

That is the problem with players having their salaries public knowledge. It removes all bias. I'd prefer to be ignorant of the salaries, meaning no matter how hard one were to look, it wouldn't be discovered.

Yet you're positive you know what everybody thinks with regards to Hawk. Take off your The Ohio State goggles off and get reasonable. I root for Hawk, hell I have a Hawk jersey - but when he's getting torched in coverage I get a little upset because I know what he's getting paid.

If you can't follow rationale, then I guess we don't have anything else to talk about concerning AJ. Just don't insult other Packer fans on the issue because your little feelings get hurt when he's criticized.

What you don't understand is this, I DON'T GIVE A DAMN WHERE ANY PACKER PLAYER WENT TO COLLEGE!!!!!

I root for ANYONE who is on the field, I don't have my favorites, or guys who don't "live up to my expectations"

When are you going to figure it out?

Nobody is perfect, EVERYBODY gets beat now and then, doesn't matter how much they get paid.

You ARE NOT THE GM, you don't determine the worth of a player.you ARE NOT THE HC,you don't determine how much playing time a player gets.

How many times in the past 3 years has A.J. Hawk been as you say "torched" over the middle?

I am betting less than 5, yet EVERY one of those plays ended up with a new thread being created on this forum, and you NEVER let a chance go by to let it be known how you feel.

I'm sorry you get bothered by how much any player gets paid, that's Ted Thompsons job.

That is the problem with players having their salaries public knowledge. It removes all bias. I'd prefer to be ignorant of the salaries, meaning no matter how hard one were to look, it wouldn't be discovered.

You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.